The Science Pawdcast

Scichat: The Intricate Water-Energy Nexus and the Urgency of Addressing Water Scarcity with Dr. Lauren Logan

• Jason Zackowski

Share episode

Send us a text

Did you know that water is essential not only for our hydration but also for generating electricity? Our insightful conversation with Dr. Lauren Logan, an expert in the intriguing world of the energy-water nexus, brings this rarely discussed topic to light. We journeyed through the complex workings of thermoelectric plants, where water cools the electricity generation process, and navigated the energy-intensive world of water and wastewater treatment plants.

Water scarcity is a growing concern, and Dr. Logan reminds us of the urgency of valuing this precious resource beyond just our drinking needs. It is a stark reminder that we live in a world where clean water is finite and not always readily available. We also venture into the implications of using large volumes of water for irrigation in arid regions and the inherent dangers of over-pumping aquifers. Groundwater is depleting faster than it can replenish, a situation that calls for heightened awareness and judicious use.

We also took a closer look at Ohio's water and energy policies, including the controversial aspects of fracking in natural gas extraction. Our discussion raised eyebrows over Intel's staggering use of a million gallons of water a day, leading us to question the standards of water treatment and the origins of our water resources.

This episode is an important listen for anyone curious about the intricate relationship between water and energy, and the urgent need to address water scarcity.

Come join us on this enlightening journey.

Doctor Laura Logan's links:

Twitter: https://twitter.com/LHLogan1

Bunsen and Beaker Links:

The Ginger Stuffie is on presale so check the link here:

www.bunsenbernerbmd.com

Also use the code BEAKER5 to save FIVE bucks off a Beaker stuffie!

Join The Paw Pack to Support The Show!

https://bunsenbernerbmd.com/pages/paw-pack-plus-community

The Bunsen and Beaker Website has adorable merch with hundreds of different combinations of designs and apparel- all with Printful- one of the highest quality companies we could find!

www.bunsenbernerbmd.com

Sign up for our Weekly Newsletter!

Bunsen and Beaker on Twitter:

Bunsen and Beaker on TikTok:

Bunsen and Beaker on Facebook

InstaBunsandBeaks

Support the show

For Science, Empathy, and Cuteness!
Being Kind is a Superpower.
https://twitter.com/bunsenbernerbmd

Speaker 2:

Hello science enthusiasts, welcome to SciChat. My name is Jason Sikowski. I'm the dog dad of Bunsen Beaker, the science dogs on social media, and my co-hostest with the most is.

Speaker 3:

Hi there, I'm Chris Sikowski. I am the dog mom to Bunsen Beaker and the cat mom to Jinder.

Speaker 2:

We are thrilled today to have an expert guest, dr Lauren Logan, with us today. Doc, without further ado, welcome to SciChat. How are you?

Speaker 4:

I'm good thanks for having me.

Speaker 2:

And how are?

Speaker 4:

you all doing.

Speaker 2:

Well, we're a little busy and I think you can. You're in the same boat because you're at. Things have started back up with you at your school, right? I think you mentioned that, yes.

Speaker 4:

Yes, ohio, northern. This is our second week of class, so still very busy.

Speaker 2:

Yes, and both Chris and I are high school teachers, so we are starting up, and things are like go, go, go, go, go, go go. It's a little bananas. It's all good though. Anyways, doc, welcome to SciChat. I introduced you as Dr Logan. What's your training in science?

Speaker 4:

So I have a fair bit of training in science and I'll weave that story for everyone listening. But I've just in general, I've always loved science and as a kid I would make up my own science experiments because there just wasn't enough science in the day at school. So then I would come home from school and do more science and read science textbooks for fun. So if that is any indication of how much I love science, hopefully that says a lot. I also love math a lot. Same kind of thing would be solving some math problems for fun. Then that led me on my path to going to college in an undergrad. So I did my undergrad at Ohio University in Athens, ohio, which is where I'm from. So shout out to anybody in the Athens area, even just Ohio. So at OhioU I really liked science. As we've said, I also got interested in engineering from my work in 4-H. So anybody who is a 4-H member knows what that is. Hopefully. Shout out to all of you. Hopefully get it.

Speaker 4:

That's where I got my engineering start. So I was like, wow, I don't know what to do. Do I want science? Do I want engineering? So I just did both. So I did electrical engineering and geological sciences at the same time and did two undergraduate degrees because apparently one was just not enough. So that was my start. And then I realized I wanted to go more the environmental engineering kind of route, like kind of swirl it all together. So I did an interdisciplinary program at Purdue University and my master's is in biology. But it was a mix of biology, engineering, some public policy stuff too. And then I did my PhD at University of Illinois, at Urbana-Champaign, in civil engineering again swirl and all that stuff together, and if you put the degrees like in a blender you get the energy water nexus. So I really love what I do.

Speaker 2:

That is a great synopsis. So, Doc, you were big into science as a kid and that just followed you through with math and science to your talking to us today.

Speaker 4:

Yes, yes.

Speaker 2:

Did you go to the library and destroy the science section and take out all the books? Were you like one of those kids?

Speaker 4:

Yeah, I would go to the library. I would always check out more books than I could actually read and spoiler alert I'm also now that person that goes to the bookstore and buys more books than I'll ever actually be able to read in my lifetime. But I still read a lot and do a lot, and I also would find the well, I guess the for free bin at the library, like the outdated books how they have once a year maybe they'll do a purge and set out books for free, and I was the kid that would specifically go find all of the science textbooks that they were getting rid of and then take them home and read them.

Speaker 2:

I love that. So you mentioned you all of this training. It's like consolidated itself into something called the water energy nexus. No spoiler alert the doc was a full guest on the science podcast and we're having her back. She's so awesome. I had no idea what that was and I was wondering if you could explain to us what the water energy nexus is.

Speaker 4:

I would love to. This is my bread and butter. This is the stuff I teach in my classes. I research it. This is what I live and breathe.

Speaker 4:

So water, energy nexus or energy water nexus means the same thing, doesn't matter which word you put. First is the relationship that our energy infrastructure and resources have with water, and then our water infrastructure and resources, how they utilize energy. So specifically, think about a power plant. So you have a coal plant, a nuclear plant, natural gas plant. Those are all thermoelectric plants. So there's some kind of thermal reaction that we're using to then generate electricity. That reaction, whether it's the burning of coal or the actual nuclear reaction and nuclear plant, we have to actually cool down the process after we have used water to do a steam cycle within the plant. So there's an internal loop, but that loop needs cooled. Guess what? We use water? So lots of water, very high volumes of water, are used to cool large power plants.

Speaker 4:

You can also think about things like there's water in the mining process for coal. There's water that's used in hydraulic fracturing and actually just had a paper come out last year about that. So looking at water use and hydraulic fracturing. And there's water for mining of elements, for even solar panels. So basically any type of energy. At some point water was used somewhere. Now you can quantify that and look at different amounts and we can have discussions about all that. But big point, big picture energy needs water. Flip side think of a drinking water treatment plant, a wastewater treatment plant. To operate those spaces, those pieces of infrastructure, it takes energy. So a wastewater treatment plant is going to have an electricity bill and they're going to need to run pumps and equipment. So you can't have clean water without energy. So that's my very fast version of the energy water nexus. But there's so many fun details within that.

Speaker 2:

One thing I appreciate about the way you describe it is like there's people who have a foot in one type of camp or another right their foot's, like in the coal thermoelectric plant, and they're all in on that and they might gloss over some of the things that are good or bad about it just so they can be in that camp. And the same thing goes for renewables, like you just mentioned, the mining for the elements that go into batteries or solar panels. And I appreciate that because I think if you don't tell everybody everything then you are kind of misleading the public If all of the information isn't out there.

Speaker 4:

Yeah, yeah, I'm feeling that I believe in a lot is full information, for sure, and science communication, and that's something I teach my students in my classes as well. So we do a lot of science communication, especially in my elective courses, which are the upper level, junior, senior classes. I go all in on how do we communicate this stuff? Why is it important to have all of the information? And my famous tagline it's, it's coming. Everything's a trade-off.

Speaker 2:

I love that there is no right or wrong.

Speaker 4:

Everything's a trade-off.

Speaker 2:

Okay, can. Can I ask you a couple questions about, like different types of power? Okay, so is there, can you? I don't know if you can't even answer this, if this is a dumb question, but is there a type of power, power Production like electricity, that uses by far the most water that you can quantify, or is it? Or is it too complicated to get there?

Speaker 4:

so To understand that water use Well, we'll have to break down two keywords. And then I have answers for this. Okay so we have water withdrawal and water consumption. So water withdrawal at a location, so we'll just pick our generic thermal electric power plant. They're going to withdraw water from either a river or a lake or, if it's on a coastline, we're withdrawing it from the ocean. Of course we have to desalinate a little and do some cleaning.

Speaker 4:

Yeah but we're withdrawing. So that withdrawal means that it has been pulled from the source. It might or might not be returned to the source, so we quantify what's coming in. There's also consumption at power plants, which means that it's part of what was withdrawn and then it is consumed at that space, so it is not returned. So a good example of consumption would be if you have a power plant that Loses a lot of that cooling water to evaporation, because the cooling water is actually the heat sink at the power plant, so now it's hot. And if we're doing evaporative cooling, we have cooling towers with cooling ponds, we're losing some of the initial withdrawal to the atmosphere, essentially. So water is not created or destroyed, but it's consumed at that place. So it's not going back. It's gonna come down as rain cloud somewhere else. It's being used in a way that we're just not returning it.

Speaker 1:

Okay.

Speaker 4:

So with drawing consumption. Now, if we look at power plants specifically, like our nuclear, coal, natural gas, those types of power plants definitely withdraw much more water than, say, like your Solar and wind, because solar and wind, while we're using them we're not required to have that cooling, we're not doing a cooling loop. So they're really only using the water in the sense of during the fabrication, the mining processes, the creation of the wind turbine. But a coal plant, natural gas, nuclear, we are withdrawing a lot of water For that cooling. And then, within those big three, nuclear really likes to consume a lot of water.

Speaker 2:

It's thirsty.

Speaker 4:

Yes, nuclear is very thirsty. It runs very hot, so we have to cool it a lot. And that's, if you, if anybody has ever been at a Lake or a river near a nuclear plant, you might have noticed that the water is a lot warmer there than in other locations. So from a Creation perspective, it's a lot of fun to swim in a lake that's attached to a nuclear plant, because it's gonna be a lot warmer During the year than the surrounding lakes.

Speaker 2:

But then, as you said, there's a trade-off. I believe nuclear doesn't produce the same amounts of CO2.

Speaker 4:

Correct in the use phase in the use. Yes, in the use phase. So while the plant exists we don't have that same CO2 footprint that we would with burning coal or burning natural gas. Now there's still a CO2 footprint from the infrastructure that is created.

Speaker 4:

So your concrete, there's a CO2 footprint, the infrastructure, all those pieces. But you could also argue that a coal plant and a nuclear natural gas plant also have those CO2 footprints. Right, there's some amount of concrete, there's materials used. So now you're looking at what's called a life cycle assessment and trying to really pinpoint, start to finish. How much CO2? Equivalence did I produce from this one power plant?

Speaker 2:

Huh, it's so complicated doc.

Speaker 4:

It is. It's very complicated, but that's the stuff that I love looking at. It's so complicated, it's so fun.

Speaker 2:

Now do you? I see some people with speaker requests will take speaker requests in a bit. We're just doing a little interview and then and then we'll we'll hold the questions to the end. Um, do you like the debate or do you like? Do you do you like making a decision, like, do you have an opinion or do you prefer the whole, getting all the facts and and having that debate? Do you know where I'm? Do you know where I'm going with that?

Speaker 4:

Yeah, yeah, I would say a little of both. I like, I like. The new information is coming out with the, the energy debate, if you will, people are learning new things, myself included. The life cycle assessment analyses are getting more exact or getting new information, so that's a really exciting space to be in. But then, at the end of the day, even though everything's a trade-off, you can decide what pieces are more important to you. So if you're looking at water conservation, hey, maybe nuclear is not really your friend. If you're looking at co2 footprint, hey, nuclear is your friend. So you gotta decide. In the location you're looking to build a new power facility, you have to decide what's right for that location and overall, what's right as we move forward, trying to make our grid more green. You know, reduce co2, but also I'm a big fan of reducing water withdrawal and consumption. So I Personally would love to see more wind and solar. I was just gonna say, if you mix.

Speaker 2:

If you need a whole bunch of water, you can't. Until I talk to you, I was just like you can build a plant anywhere you want, you can just like build it, but it needs water. So if you build a plant, like in a place where there's no water, you got to get the water there somehow. You're gonna be trucking it or training it or I don't know right, or piping right, you would have to have some kind of pipeline.

Speaker 4:

Yeah it would have to be a big pipeline. You have to have enough to run the plant efficiently. So that's why location helps us make some of these decisions. So like Arizona, perfect for solar panels.

Speaker 2:

Yeah, slap them up. They don't need much water in the use phase. I'm picking up your lingo.

Speaker 4:

Yeah, yeah, use phase. You know, occasionally the solar panel might need washed. But, you know, get a good rainstorm and we're fine. So let's not put a nuclear plant in Arizona, but let's put a lot of solar and let's put some wind turbines in the Kind of northern area of the Midwest where there's a lot of wind.

Speaker 4:

Yeah, and it's air windy city, so put up a wind turbine. But in an area where we have plentiful natural gas and we can get to it easily and effectively, let's use some natural gas. So it really is a mix. We need a true mix, but we could definitely pump up the solar and wind, in my opinion.

Speaker 2:

Right, well, that's cool. I I so appreciate your frankness and having just a little bit more of the facts on the table with the trade-off, the goods and the bads of everything. And until I talked to you, I didn't even think about water, wasn't even on my radar.

Speaker 4:

It's not on a lot of people's radar, but hey, I'm here to to make you all aware. But now you all have that, that fun fact you can share with your friends at dinner party.

Speaker 2:

I think it's just because, like, I've always lived in a place where there's water everywhere. Um, we don't live in an arid place. There's lakes and rivers all over the place in where we live, uh, so it's just not something that crossed my mind. There's places without water over rivers or lakes nearby, so yeah, so I have a couple kind of like questions that are more pop-cultury. If we could move into that, if that's okay. Yes, they're kind of fun, they're a little out there, but I think Um, they're, they're they tie into this whole water energy. Uh, the issue Um, have you seen mad max fury road doc.

Speaker 4:

I have not, but I know where this is going. I think so continue.

Speaker 2:

Right. So in the Mad Max series, especially Fury Road, water is an extremely scarce resource. It's so scarce they like worship the people that have water, and I know in Southern Alberta, where we live in Alberta in Canada, they are in a drought, like in different places of Alberta far south of us. It's actually ecological, or what is it? What did they call it, chris? An economic disaster for the farmers this season. It's really bad for them, right? And I'm just wondering, like do you see a future where we have not enough water to do the things that we do, where it becomes a precious resource? I know in places of the world it is, but not necessarily in North America. We just have lots of water.

Speaker 4:

So I see a future where we do value water more from the intrinsic value. I need this to live, I need this to function for many reasons. So I am hopeful, in a positive sense, that we will start to assign this higher value to water before it gets worse. So, in a sense, we start realizing that water is precious, particularly access to clean water and access to water that we can use for cooling a power plant or for cleaning, so we can drink it. So it's really about where is the water, how much is there and is it usable? Because we're not creating or destroying water.

Speaker 4:

We have a certain amount of water on the planet. It's not going anywhere in terms of it's not just leaving planet Earth. It's either. Maybe it's becoming an iceberg in one location and maybe it's an iceberg that's melting in another location. But can we use it is the big question, and do we have it where we need it? So that's, we're pushing to a future where water scarcity, particularly by a location, and then also because of pollution or other issues, we're gonna start having to pay attention to it a little more, and I hope that people are doing that now so that we're prepared for later.

Speaker 2:

Okay, so I don't necessarily need to get my Immortan Joe like gear on for the Mad Max water wars yet.

Speaker 4:

Not yet. Hopefully we don't see that soon. But talk to me again in five or 10 years We'll do another interview and see where we're at by then.

Speaker 2:

Right, this may be because I'm not. I don't know what I'm talking about, but I'm gonna ask you because you do. I've been places where it is extremely dry but there are massive amounts of agriculture with irrigation and I'm like where are they getting this water from? Like, is that sustainable? Have you heard the concerns about this in the last couple of years?

Speaker 4:

Yes, yes, so they're.

Speaker 2:

What's your opinion on that?

Speaker 4:

if you don't mind me asking so with irrigation and particularly areas where you look around and you're thinking, well, there's not a lake or a river in sight, so specifically arid regions or even semi-arid, but they're not next to a lake or anything. So those areas tend to be using groundwater resources, so they're pumping from underground aquifers. This means that there's water underground, right Ground water. It's not an underground lake. So anybody who's not familiar with the term, we're not talking about some kind of magical underground lake. We're talking about water that is essentially mixed in between layers of soil and rock and different things, and when we pump it out, so we're pulling basically just the water out, and that's what a lot of irrigation systems in those arid regions are using.

Speaker 4:

Now the question then is okay, well, what happens to all that groundwater? Well, if we're pumping at a rate faster than it can replenish, so when there's a rain it infiltrates into the ground, that rainwater then can help replenish a groundwater source and there are other ways to do it too but basically, rain in groundwater out. We're doing a simplified model here. If we're pumping faster than we're putting it back in, then we start to get issues. And particularly out in like California and Nevada and different areas, there are aquifers that we've over pumped to the point where the ground is starting to sink down or called subsidence, and so in those areas we definitely need to figure out some new techniques to reduce water use.

Speaker 4:

Do we need to move some of those crops to different locations? But then that's a whole other issue of now. You're taking away land or jobs from the people who live there already and are doing these things, so now that's a bigger discussion, right, I'm not gonna sit here and tell a farmer they can't farm anymore, but also we're eventually gonna get to some of these aquifers being dried up, so then they won't be able to farm anymore anyway.

Speaker 2:

So how do we figure that out? The planet will tell them that it's a no-go, no more.

Speaker 4:

Right.

Speaker 2:

Can I ask you another pop-cultury thing?

Speaker 4:

Yes.

Speaker 2:

Okay, so are you familiar with disaster movies, like, have you seen a few disaster movies?

Speaker 4:

Oh yeah, yeah, I love a good disaster movie and I love a good horror movie.

Speaker 2:

Okay, so one comes to mind I believe it's called San Andreas and it's got the Rock, and there's a scene in it where, like I think the Hoover Dam explodes, like it blows up, is that, and there's just crazy destruction. And maybe I'm getting my movie wrong, but like there's a lot of water behind these dams and you're a water person, is that likely? Like would there be mass destruction if some of these dams just gave way?

Speaker 4:

So the short answer is yes.

Speaker 2:

Oh, okay.

Speaker 4:

The specifics are. Disaster movies always make it look way different or emphasize the wrong parts of the disaster, if you will, or something explodes in a way that it really wouldn't explode. So the specifics of the how and what are gonna be different than disaster films, but at the end of the day, if you have a very large dam, that does give way, yes, millions, trillions of gallons of water are now rushing downstream and they're going fast because there's nothing holding them up anymore and so you are gonna get destruction where it's wiping out anything in its path. Basically and there are some historical examples of things like this happening where we've had dam breaks, there's been some earthen dams that were built with some of the coal mining and Appalachia that then those earthen dams have busted and then cause destruction downstream to towns and people who lived in those areas.

Speaker 4:

There's I've read about that kind of stuff a lot, being from the Appalachia region and studying coal and all this. So there's been a lot of coal mining, specific disasters with dams giving way. There's also things like the Johnstown flood in Pennsylvania. That's a good historical example where live accounts the people who witnessed it and survived talked about houses floating down the river and things like that. So when it happens which it's not as if it happens all the time so don't everybody get scared and think that every dam is gonna explode. But when one does give way, yes, there is a lot of destruction, cause there's just millions of gallons of water that need to get somewhere, and water flows downhill.

Speaker 2:

Hmm, okay, so we just-.

Speaker 4:

And Arwin is saying hi, I don't know if y'all could hear that I can hear that it's adorable.

Speaker 2:

yeah, I was gonna have some cute comment like I guess we better make sure we work on getting somebody like the rock on our, our contact list, in case.

Speaker 4:

Yes, get somebody who it can get you in an airplane, can carry you to safety. Whatever the the disaster movie gimmick you know, but it really it's. It's be prepared If you do live downstream from a dam and just follow Guidelines. Things like if they say, hey, we're getting a lot of extra rain, we're gonna have to do a release. That doesn't mean they're releasing the whole dam. That just means we might be releasing where there's some minor flooding. Be ready, things like that.

Speaker 4:

So pay attention and the you know, Our dams are everything, are very safe, we're fine, but in case, be ready.

Speaker 2:

Gotcha Good point In the news and you probably you probably know about this, doc the Fukushima Daiichi plant plant Is releasing a whole bunch of nuclear wastewater into the ocean and I think it actually kind of made China mad at Japan that they did this. Yes, is that something that we should be concerned about? Like, let's say, you're gonna go surfing off the coast of Vancouver Island, like do you need to worry, you're gonna come back with three eyes. It does this happen here at home with our nuclear plants?

Speaker 4:

so I've done some digging on it and it is an interesting case study of having all the facts and and some of the public not understanding what's going on. So let's, let's break it down.

Speaker 4:

Okay so they are releasing some of the water that's been held back and and there was the disaster Fukushima with the, the nuclear plant, when there was the tsunami and and they couldn't fully operate anymore and they had to keep trying to cool Things so they didn't have a total meltdown. So a lot happened and and that means at this point there's still some water that is essentially radioactive or has the potential to cause harm, and it's Good, they're just excited about the story doc.

Speaker 4:

Yeah, they just he really wants everyone to know that. You know, things happen with nuclear power. So the the water that's been kept there is has been still harmful in the sense of while it's being kept. But the water they're releasing they've been treating and so they've done removal of those harmful Radioactive particulates and and other matter that's in there. And what's being released out is very low levels of tritium, which is an isotope of hydrogen. So, assuming all the operations are working correctly, that they have all the machinery up and going, that's the only thing that's really being released, and it's being released in very low levels.

Speaker 4:

So, assuming all is operational, they're not really adding a lot to the ocean. Now they're still adding something. It's different. It is not ocean water. So then the question becomes what are the the long-term impacts and implications of this? And that's something that Basically, I think would make a really great research project. So hey, anybody who's excited to do a research project, check that out. That could be something to look at. And they're following the age-old I guess we'll call it a phrase that the Solution to pollution is dilution.

Speaker 2:

Oh, I that one. That is a phrase from like the 1950s, isn't it doc?

Speaker 4:

Yeah, yeah it's. You know it tells all this time that let's just dilute it so that then it's not pollution anymore, it's diluted, and so really, you know that gets at the heart of what's happening. And then the question is what are these safe levels? But also, I want to point out, there are other types of industries that are putting higher concentrations of Different chemicals or compounds into the ocean, into our waterways.

Speaker 4:

So to specifically pinpoint just Fukushima feels very wrong when we should look at the picture as a whole of what all is actually going into our waterways, not just this one specific instance. Right, it's a bigger picture question of okay, well, what about the you know the manufacturing plant down the street that makes skillets? What about the textile company you know one town over? What are they putting in? And that's where we really need to study these things and also limit when we can, so that we're not just hoping that that dilution works out for everyone.

Speaker 3:

That's awesome. I just have a quick question. So when we're returning the water into a river, isn't it not warm water that's going back into the river? And then how would that work with Fukushima going into the ocean, where there's a larger Body of water, where you're putting the water, the warm water, in, or the hot water, yeah yeah, the aquatic ecosystem there so with the the thermal pollution.

Speaker 4:

So this is the technical term for its thermal pollution. That's what I did my my dissertation on was specifically the thermal pollution aspect. So the amount of thermal pollution depends specifically on the plant size and their operational parameters and then how it impacts an ecosystem also depends then on the ecosystem into which you're placing the thermal pollution. So you know. Quick example you have a very large power plant on a very small river. You are boiling the river. If you have a small power plant on a large river, there's not a whole Thermal pollution compared to the majority of the water channel. There's still. It still exists and there can still be ecosystem impacts.

Speaker 4:

You can look at changes in fish populations. Do we have Invasive invasive species migrating to this location? Have we changed the plant matter which then impacts food sources for the species living there? So there's a lot that goes into this, but it's still kind of that question of what's the size of that plume going in and what is the size of the water body. So a river, we have movement away from the source, so it's going to carry it downstream, but it's also more concentrated. Then say, if we're putting this into the ocean and particularly we get it out past the the zone where we have the waves bringing it back, and so my understanding, especially at Fukushima at least, is that they are pumping this water farther out To help avoid that collection right at the coastline.

Speaker 2:

Okay, chris, are you good with that question?

Speaker 3:

I'm great with that question.

Speaker 2:

Okay, Doc, thanks so much for like entertaining us and educating us with my questions and for people waiting to ask a question. We're going to move to you, so keep your questions on point, and Chris and I have the basically the right to moderate who comes up. So if you are an account that just was created yesterday with a whole bunch of zeros and ones and you're following two people, you may not get up to ask a question.

Speaker 3:

Dr Tracy.

Speaker 5:

Hi, I'm a retired professor at OU and I still live in Athens, nice, hello, hello, nice to see one of our graduates here. And I just wanted to say there's an excellent article in the New York Times today about the groundwater depletion problem in the United States and our groundwater level trends have decreased and are declining to the point that they are no longer refilled by rain and there are aquifers going dry in the central part of the country, in the west, on the eastern seaboard, and there are also problems in southwest Ohio, central Ohio and northeastern Ohio. Yes, yes.

Speaker 4:

There is a lot of groundwater use across the US. You're right, and we, you know, and as particularly in Ohio you know, people who think about water probably think oh well, we have rivers, we have lakes, we also have groundwater and we're still depleting it not perhaps as much as other areas in the US, but we're still using it and it's all adding up and that's a good point you made to check out that article and, yeah, I encourage readers to check it out. There is a lot of accounting in the recent years here trying to understand groundwater depletion rates versus the replenishment. It's an excellent article.

Speaker 5:

And in Ohio in particular, it's a problem because, with fracking of natural gas and you pointed out that natural gas is an option for energy in places where there's a lot of it the problem is that it causes problems to our groundwater and pollutes it, particularly here in southeastern Ohio, where Ohio law permits them fossil fuel mining, to use water any way they want and then dispose of it any way they want, and so they're disposing of it here in southeastern Ohio in open ponds and it's poison and it's also radioactive and there's nothing we can do. Ohio law prevents us from suing them or taking them to the water. It prevents us from suing them or taking any action.

Speaker 4:

Yeah, I'll add to that, because Ohio law around hydraulic fracturing and energy in general is a little confusing. There's forgive me, I don't remember the exact bill numbers, but a couple years ago there were on the same day they had essentially a Senate bill and I think the other one was a house bill, or they were both Senate bills that went up where one said that counties could veto solar and wind projects because they felt like it.

Speaker 4:

Basically you know, find reason, but they had no power to veto hydraulic fracturing, and so those came up on the same day and both passed. So it's like, well, wait, do we want to give control to communities to make decisions about energy, or do we not want that? And the message is clear that, well, if it's one, it's okay, if it's these other two, it's not okay. So, yeah, very, very interesting, very tricky landscape with energy policy.

Speaker 2:

Oh yes, it's good we're talking about it, though I didn't even know anything about that. I don't, of course. We don't live close to Ohio. Go ahead, kf, at word working, you just have to unmute yourself.

Speaker 1:

There we go. Okay, there you go.

Speaker 1:

Can you hear me now? Yeah, yeah, back to Ohio. They're building an Intel semiconductor plant out by Newark and they use approximately or about a million gallons possibly plus a day to cool the equipment that's used to make the semiconductors. Those are little pieces that go in your phone and your computers and all that kind of good stuff. My research on it what little I've done, to be honest is that there's a plant in New Mexico and also a plant in Oregon and one of the states put their foot down and said you're screwing up our water, knock it off or leave.

Speaker 1:

The government US government has given Intel here in Ohio quite a considerable amount of money to build this plant because they want to bring the production of the materials that we buy as a whole back to the states so that we're not dependent on Asia. They claim that they've got a process to clean the water and put it back in the system, but the problem I see is A they're not very transparent about it. B that's an awful lot of water and I don't think there's enough groundwater for that. That's daily, daily, and then it goes back into the drinking water. Is there anything that can be done or what are your thoughts on this whole kind of process, because it seems to be in your water and water out arena.

Speaker 4:

Yeah, yeah, so with any industry. I mean in this case you're talking about Intel and I know there's a lot of excitement and buzz about the Intel plant going in because there is going to be a lot of job creation and other things that come from it. But certainly that also means, yeah, there's going to be water use and material use and other things we have to consider. So, from the water and water out perspective, if the Intel plant truly does clean the water and there are ways to do that I mean we clean water for drinking in the United States so that when you turn on the tap you're not drinking pond water, you're drinking, you know, pond water that was treated so that it's safe for you to drink and a lot of things have been removed. So presumably you know, let's say, best case scenario they are going to treat that and then, depending on the permits that they get for their outfall, so basically their outlet of their water, they will have to treat to certain standards, following, like the Clean Water Act guidelines, and there's this system called the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System, or NPDES, that does permitting for particularly power plants especially, but other water polluters, if you will. So then they have to follow those guidelines to be able to be given these permits. So I what I foresee is that, yes, it's going to be a strain from a water resource perspective how much do we have? But if we're treating it and using it effectively, then the input output ratio we're going to be able to balance that and you can return clean water back to the waterways with the different cleaning systems following these permitted guidelines. So I'm hopeful that we won't see issues with this specific plant that's going in.

Speaker 4:

In Ohio, power plants use many, many gallons of water a day also. So when you said a million gallons a day, I know that sounds like a lot and it is, but in my mind the numbers I look at with power plants a million gallons is like okay, because I'm just so used to those large numbers in my research and definitely is it come you know, are we getting it from a river? Is it coming from groundwater? Is it a combination? Where are we taking it from and where are we putting it back into? Those are specifically the things to look for and are they following their permitted guidelines and were they given, you know, good information as they design and build this plant so they can do it effectively and do it in a way that makes the community successful. I hope that answered your question.

Speaker 1:

It does it does you know the last couple of points you made. There remain to be seen, obviously, but and I'm, to be honest with you kind of skeptical of the way the state runs. Things like this, like Dr Tracy was talking about. They don't have a good history of being good citizens, if you will. So I'm watching it and I'm sure a lot of people are. So thank you for answering the question.

Speaker 4:

Yeah, you're welcome and I would say I think it is always good to be watchful, have the correct information, but still keep your eye out for times when permits aren't met or conditions do change or something. You do notice a change in a waterway, it's like, well, maybe something really is going on here. So it's always good to be watchful, but at the end of the day also there is the science there. So it's both and we hope that people do what they're supposed to do.

Speaker 2:

KF. That was a really good question. Again, Ohio is so far east from where we live in the world Like you guys are, like right under one of the great lakes. I have a map up just so I know where Ohio is. You're under Lake Erie. There we go.

Speaker 1:

Yes, yes, yeah, great Lake Erie, lake Erie.

Speaker 2:

Yeah, I'm sorry, like that is so far away from where we live in the world. It is so complicated because you can imagine if a plant that size comes to a region it would be incredible for the economy and for people getting jobs. But it's complicated and, as the doc says, there's always a trade-off and I would never have thought of the water thing with a plant like that.

Speaker 1:

Yeah, it's, the numbers are. We're a little shocking when I first read them because where they're located there isn't really a lot of there aren't a lot of rivers. It's gotta be all coming from groundwater. So I was the comments earlier about taking all the groundwater away and lancing it down. I, for some reason, that's where I'm going in my head.

Speaker 4:

Yeah, I think, with any new infrastructure going in right, like you said, it remains to be seen. We'll see what the changes are. Everything is a trade-off, right, it's gonna provide awesome jobs, but there's gonna be more traffic and we're gonna use more resources to build homes and shopping malls and dentist office and whatever else in that area, because people are gonna be flocking to that area.

Speaker 1:

So it's, oh yeah, it's ugly already and they haven't even oh man. They've just got the site work done. They don't even have the walls up yet and they're already screaming. And I don't. I get it, because a lot of the farmers around here are selling off because they're done farming, because they're having trouble with growing crops, because there isn't enough rainfall. So they're selling off, and they should be allowed to do so. It's just, it's complicated.

Speaker 4:

Right, it's complicated, it's a trade-off.

Speaker 2:

If anything, having conversations like this is how we all stay on our toes, how we think about other perspectives we might not have. If we didn't have the doc on our show and Dr Tracy and yourself, kf, didn't ask those questions, I wouldn't even thought about Ohio, I wouldn't even be in my brain for like ever, probably, because it's not. It's just so out of our realm of what we think about every day. So I think this is so cool. Well, I think we've got. We're gonna wrap stuff up right now, because I told Dr Logan that we'd be about an hour. Doc, thank you so much for being our guest today and talking about things that spark debate and thinking and different perspectives. It's very important and I so appreciate it.

Speaker 4:

Yeah, thanks for having me, and you know I'll just say one last thing for listeners make good choices and help others to make good choices with the information that you have.

Speaker 2:

That's a good way to end. If you're not already following the doc, please make sure that you do. And yeah, thanks again. Super awesome chat today, doc, really appreciate it.

Speaker 4:

Yeah, enjoy the rest of your evening, everyone.

Speaker 2:

Yeah, and give your dog goes a pet. Did they see something exciting when they were barking?

Speaker 4:

You know, I think somebody in the street opened a car door.

Speaker 2:

Oh.

Speaker 4:

So very, very top notch news that needed to be barked about.

Speaker 2:

Chris, how did you keep Bunsen so quiet? Was he grumbling the whole time?

Speaker 3:

Jason, I have a set my sleeve. It's called go to barking beyond or not barking beyond. Go to bowling biscuit and buy super chews.

Speaker 2:

Oh, super chews.

Speaker 3:

These. I said hello, how long will these chews last? And she said, oh, these are super chews. And I said I will take two and try them out. That's what I did, Jason.

Speaker 2:

That's great. I have to do that. That's great.

Speaker 3:

But I'm gonna put the dog goes in the nest.

Speaker 2:

Oh, lawrence, dogs in the nest.

Speaker 3:

Yeah, it says happy dog day to these adorable and goofy pups. What are their names?

Speaker 4:

Aragorn is the doxin and Arwen is the little baby pup. She's a toy Aussie.

Speaker 2:

Oh my God, I love your little Aussie, so cute, super cute.

Speaker 3:

They're both cute. Well, okay, they're both.

Speaker 2:

I'm so sorry, they're both adorable. I didn't mean, yeah, I just Aussies kind of look like Bunsen. They have like the similar kind of markings.

Speaker 4:

Yes, the coloring yeah.

Speaker 2:

Yeah. So, as we wrap up, one more time, thanks to the doc for being our guest. Don't forget Pet Chat is this Saturday. We're back. We are back with Pet Chat. Chris, who do we have next week for side chat? I don't know. Do you have access to the doc? What are we doing it?

Speaker 3:

next week. I didn't have access what?

Speaker 2:

Dr Jessica Maddox.